tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post116494858005309229..comments2017-12-07T12:02:56.079-07:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Atheist Evangelism and Political StrategyAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1165114556425221532006-12-02T19:55:00.000-07:002006-12-02T19:55:00.000-07:00Thanks! I also found a link at Newsmax (ugh.)Here'...Thanks! I also found a link at <A HREF="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/6/27/144852.shtml" REL="nofollow">Newsmax</A> (ugh.)<BR/><BR/>Here's my <A HREF="http://www.nmmng.co.uk/art.php?id=45723b11" REL="nofollow">post</A> if anyone's interested.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1165106529667480042006-12-02T17:42:00.000-07:002006-12-02T17:42:00.000-07:00Mr. Bush made the claim initially in response to t...Mr. Bush made the claim initially in response to the Pledge of Allegiance case.<BR/><BR/>I trust that you will be content to reference a transcript and video on the White House web site itself.<BR/><BR/>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020627-3.html#<BR/><BR/>"Yesterday a court in America made a ruling that I want to comment on. America is a nation that is -- a nation that values our relationship with an Almighty. Declaration of God in the Pledge of Allegiance doesn't violate rights. As a matter of fact, it's a confirmation of the fact that we received our rights from God, as proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence. <BR/><BR/>I -- I believe that it points up the fact that we need common-sense judges who understand that our rights were derived from God. And those are the kind of judges I intend to put on the bench."Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1165103105526703472006-12-02T16:45:00.000-07:002006-12-02T16:45:00.000-07:00Alonzo - I surfed here from Unscrewing the Inscrut...Alonzo - I surfed here from Unscrewing the Inscrutable. Great essay! I'm a survivor of child abuse and your analogy about children trying to avoid a beating really hit home.<BR/><BR/>One question - do you have a cite for Bush saying atheists aren't qualified to be judges? I vaguely remember it happening but I have no idea of the timeframe, and couldn't track it down with Google. Your post has inspired me to draft an article on my own blog, and I would like to have a link to document the point.<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/><BR/>No More Mr. Nice Guy! (www.nmmng.co.uk)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1165070069842393602006-12-02T07:34:00.000-07:002006-12-02T07:34:00.000-07:00Some of the points Dawkins makes are excellent. Ot...Some of the points Dawkins makes are excellent. Others are weak. His views on morality, on the Old Testament and on the anthropmorphism of many views of God are unanserable. His chapter on "Why there cannot be a God" is weak.<BR/><BR/>There is one important question that has not been asked and that is about what the nature of religion is. A religion is partly about belief in God and is partly about transferring ones prejudices to God. Religious people in fact present a rather dishonest prospectus. If you were to say for example that you found being in bed with another man distasteful one would say - "OK that's your choice", bring religion in and we elevate this to a moral principle.<BR/><BR/>Stephen Pinker has said that pastural ssocieties are more violent than agricultural or industrial ones. The Arabs for example are pasturalists who have transferred the norms of their violent code into Islam. The Koran BTW is rather ambiguous. Dawkins is correct to point out that religion when it does this is a thouroughly bad thing.<BR/><BR/>He is wrong though to say that religion is the root of all evil. This is reserved for nationalism and racism. Religion only in so far as it underlines a national identity.Ian Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09444108158735614097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1164969605861676612006-12-01T03:40:00.000-07:002006-12-01T03:40:00.000-07:00I find it odd that a lot of people who themselves ...I find it odd that a lot of people who themselves have nothing against atheism or atheists still react worried when someone declares their atheism in a conversation about beliefs.<BR/>In many instances when I declared my opinion on religion, the people around me reacted as if I should have kept it to myself, even close relatives.<BR/><BR/>When the census was conducted I wondered what to say about my religion affiliation:<BR/>Atheist-agnostic, other or dose-not-wish-to-answer. I said Atheist-agnostic and my own mother, who is no more fond of organized religions than me, looked at me with concern and asked if I was sure.<BR/><BR/>WTF?<BR/><BR/>If I live in a country where I might be harmed or discriminated based on my beliefs that say more about the morality of the country (general population) than it dose about mine.<BR/><BR/>If we are cats, let us be lions and stand up for ourselves - not hide away like kittens.<BR/>If we are cattle, let us be buffalos and stand together – not scatter frightened for easy picking.<BR/>Either way let us show courage. Passive submission never improved anything.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1164953164932636342006-11-30T23:06:00.000-07:002006-11-30T23:06:00.000-07:00Yes, there is a relationship between law and polit...Yes, there is a relationship between law and politics. The very concepts of 'just' and 'unjust' laws and institutions speak to this overlap.<BR/><BR/>My concern is not between morality and politics, but between morality and strategy.<BR/><BR/>Note that the most vile person on the planet might be an excellent strategist, and that good strategy can be put into play in defense of the most evil ends.<BR/><BR/>Karl Rove, I would argue, is an excellent strategist. It is our misfortune as a society that we are cursed with somebody who decides to use that skill to pursue ends that are, in fact, evil.<BR/><BR/>I also believe that there is reason to favor some sort of specialization of effort. Being a strategist requires doing certain types of research that I do not have time to do. For the sake of efficiency, I would argue that I do research into the moral issues, and leave the strategic issues to experts in that field - and hope that I can convince at least some of them to pay attention to the moral issues along the way.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1164952665285070632006-11-30T22:57:00.000-07:002006-11-30T22:57:00.000-07:00Good point about the pro-wrestling nature of the c...Good point about the pro-wrestling nature of the current debate.<BR/><BR/>But I wonder about this: <BR/><BR/>"Let me start by saying that this is an ethics blog. I care nothing about political strategy, except to ask whether particular elements of various strategies are moral or immoral."<BR/><BR/>It's obviously your blog and you can think about whatever you want to, but this strikes me as a naive and somewhat unproductive distinction. Politics and morality seem to be deeply intertwined. This seems especially true for atheists -- if there's no transcendent source of morality then people have to figure it out for themselves as a social process, and that's inevitably going to involve politics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com